Launching the Tidal Model: evaluating the evidence

Authors: GORDON, W.; MORTON, T.1; BROOKS, G.2

Source: Journal of Psychiatric & Mental Health Nursing, Volume 12, Number 6, December 2005 , pp. 703-712(10)

Publisher: Blackwell Publishing

Key:
Free Content - Free Content
New Content - New Content
Subscribed Content - Subscribed Content
Free Trial Content - Free Trial Content

Abstract:

GORDON W., MORTON T. & BROOKS G. (2005) Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing12, 703–712

Launching the Tidal Model: evaluating the evidence

This paper reports on two evaluations of the Tidal Model, in the context of two separate acute admission wards, one in Birmingham (2004) and the other in Newcastle (2001), and makes recommendations concerning the criteria and type of reasoning appropriate to evaluating the evidence the two projects have generated. In the Birmingham study, results showed that in the year following the introduction of the Tidal Model, the total number of serious untoward incidents such as physical assault, violence and harassment, decreased by 57%. Nurse satisfaction with their work also improved with nurses rating the model superior to their previous way of working. Inpatient service user assessment of the overall quality of their care was also positive. These findings are then compared with the positive results of an earlier study of the Tidal Model undertaken in Newcastle in 2001. That study was criticized, however, for not showing conclusively that the positive results of the evaluation correlated with the introduction of the Tidal Model. This criticism is briefly examined in the light of both ancient (Aristotle) and modern (Charles Peirce) understandings of the nature of evidence and suggests that such criticism begs the question of the nature of proof. The paper concludes by arguing that, according to both Aristotle and the procedures of abductive reasoning advocated by Charles Peirce, inferring a positive correlation between the results of both studies and the introduction of Tidal Model is a good example of reasonable inference to the best explanation. The available evidence suggests that the results of both studies render the conclusion probable and thus ‘good enough’ to warrant serious consideration for implementing the Tidal Model more widely within and across Mental Health NHS Trusts.

Keywords: abductive inferential reasoning; criticism; evaluation; mental health care; milieu toxicity; Tidal Model

Document Type: Research article

DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2850.2005.00901.x

Affiliations: 1: Research Manager 2: Community Psychiatric Nurse, Birmingham and Solihull NHS Mental Health Trust, Birmingham, UK

The full text electronic article is available for purchase. You will be able to download the full text electronic article after payment.

$50.16 plus tax      Refund Policy

 

OR

Back to top

Key:
Free Content - Free Content
New Content - New Content
Subscribed Content - Subscribed Content
Free Trial Content - Free Trial Content
Share this item with others: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
Page Help Click here for Page Help
Shopping cart
Tools
Sign in






Need to register?
Sign up here
Text size: A | A | A | A